• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Rabbi Sacks - 'Religion should never seek power'

I wasn't sure where to put this exactly, since it comes from Britain's Chief Rabb, I thought this might be a good place, but, please feel free to move it,if it should be elsewhere.

Anyway, I was on Rabbi Jonathan Sacks site, and was reading some of his interesting articles, and I came across this one, which I quite liked:

Religion doesn’t need, and should never seek, power. The greatest single difference between the God of Abraham and the gods of all other ancient civilizations, Mesopotamia, Egypt of the Pharaohs, Assyria, Babylon, and the rest, is that elsewhere the gods were the underwriters, the legitimaters, of power.

Our living symbol of powerlessness as Jews is the festival that begins tonight, Sukkot, Tabernacles, when we leave the comfort and security of our homes, and for seven days eat in huts with only leaves for a roof, recalling the forty year journey of our ancestors in the desert. That annual experience of vulnerability never lets us forget what religion is about: Caring for the powerless, not the pursuit of power.

The part I bolded is something I really agree with. I think religions shouldn't go after political power (as many wise people have said, power corrupts). One of the things I like about Judaism is it's message of helping others, reaching out to them, creating/fixing the world (I think the Kabbalistic/mystical term is Tikkun Olam, right?).

Anyway, what about you?, do you agree with Sacks' message, or do you have your own disagreements with it?.

 

Poisonshady313

Well-Known Member


The part I bolded is something I really agree with. I think religions shouldn't go after political power (as many wise people have said, power corrupts). One of the things I like about Judaism is it's message of helping others, reaching out to them, creating/fixing the world (I think the Kabbalistic/mystical term is Tikkun Olam, right?).

Anyway, what about you?, do you agree with Sacks' message, or do you have your own disagreements with it?.


I agree. After all, Judaism is supposed to be like a candle, illuminating the darkness. Not a raging inferno that consumes and destroys the world.
 

Yona

Frum Mastah Flex
Anyway, what about you?, do you agree with Sacks' message, or do you have your own disagreements with it?.

While historically theocratic states has lead to the opression and murder of Jews and has led to much suffering for our people however I would have to disagree, I would not say that politics and religion should never mix like some sort of axiomatic truth or something. For example, I personally agree with and support the Shas party.
 

Levite

Higher and Higher
I wasn't sure where to put this exactly, since it comes from Britain's Chief Rabb, I thought this might be a good place, but, please feel free to move it,if it should be elsewhere.

Anyway, I was on Rabbi Jonathan Sacks site, and was reading some of his interesting articles, and I came across this one, which I quite liked:


Religion doesn’t need, and should never seek, power. The greatest single difference between the God of Abraham and the gods of all other ancient civilizations, Mesopotamia, Egypt of the Pharaohs, Assyria, Babylon, and the rest, is that elsewhere the gods were the underwriters, the legitimaters, of power.
Our living symbol of powerlessness as Jews is the festival that begins tonight, Sukkot, Tabernacles, when we leave the comfort and security of our homes, and for seven days eat in huts with only leaves for a roof, recalling the forty year journey of our ancestors in the desert. That annual experience of vulnerability never lets us forget what religion is about: Caring for the powerless, not the pursuit of power.

The part I bolded is something I really agree with. I think religions shouldn't go after political power (as many wise people have said, power corrupts). One of the things I like about Judaism is it's message of helping others, reaching out to them, creating/fixing the world (I think the Kabbalistic/mystical term is Tikkun Olam, right?).

Anyway, what about you?, do you agree with Sacks' message, or do you have your own disagreements with it?.


Yeah, this is one occasion where I agree with Sacks, at least so far as the statement you bolded. I am a big believer in the power of religion to teach and to transform lives. And I am a big believer in the exclusion of religion from the arena of government.

And, I am sorry, but the State of Israel is a perfect example. Do I think Israel should be a Jewish State? Sure. Should its national language be Hebrew, and its calendar be the Jewish calendar, and its national holidays the Jewish holidays? Sure. But we need to get rid of the rabbanut, and get rid of the religious political parties. Israeli Judaism is strangling under the Haredi bootheel, and the country would benefit from a huge dose of freedom and religious pluralism.

Religion and politics just don't mix. Religion belongs in homes and in synagogues and in charitable organizations, not in congresses and parliaments, and never in theocratic religious government institutions.
 
Yeah, this is one occasion where I agree with Sacks, at least so far as the statement you bolded. I am a big believer in the power of religion to teach and to transform lives. And I am a big believer in the exclusion of religion from the arena of government.

And, I am sorry, but the State of Israel is a perfect example. Do I think Israel should be a Jewish State? Sure. Should its national language be Hebrew, and its calendar be the Jewish calendar, and its national holidays the Jewish holidays? Sure. But we need to get rid of the rabbanut, and get rid of the religious political parties. Israeli Judaism is strangling under the Haredi bootheel, and the country would benefit from a huge dose of freedom and religious pluralism.

Religion and politics just don't mix. Religion belongs in homes and in synagogues and in charitable organizations, not in congresses and parliaments, and never in theocratic religious government institutions.

If you don't mind me asking, what's the rabbanut?, BTW, what is Israeli Judaism like?, I've heard that the Haredi are actuall the minority, but, for some reason, wield a lot of power, do a lot of Israeli' adhere to Haredi beliefs?.
 

Caladan

Agnostic Pantheist
where does this Rabbi lives? oh yes the UK.
In Israel, where Judaism is the common tradition, the religious seek a great amount of power, and have an incredible amount of power over our politics, and why shouldn't they? the religious sector have their interest to promote like the rest of us and like the rest of us they will fight to the bitter end to promote their influence on the reality here.
Israel may be a secular nation officially, but Jewish tradition is one of the main driving forces here. even the secular parties will often voice pride in the Jewish heritage and humble themselves before religious leaders.
religions like Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are all about dominance and power, and that is something I admire about these long standing traditions, they will often fight to the bitter end to promote the interests of their people and the political interests of their society and this is why they are still the most relevant religions on earth, and will continue to be so.
 
Last edited:

TheKnight

Guardian of Life
I wasn't sure where to put this exactly, since it comes from Britain's Chief Rabb, I thought this might be a good place, but, please feel free to move it,if it should be elsewhere.

Anyway, I was on Rabbi Jonathan Sacks site, and was reading some of his interesting articles, and I came across this one, which I quite liked:





The part I bolded is something I really agree with. I think religions shouldn't go after political power (as many wise people have said, power corrupts). One of the things I like about Judaism is it's message of helping others, reaching out to them, creating/fixing the world (I think the Kabbalistic/mystical term is Tikkun Olam, right?).

Anyway, what about you?, do you agree with Sacks' message, or do you have your own disagreements with it?.


I don't believe religion can seek power. People seek power and use religion as a tool. Religion doesn't seek power, it can't. It's not some sort of autonomous body.
 

Caladan

Agnostic Pantheist
Religion is all about power seeking. from North America where Christianity in the US is very influential in the continent and outside it. throughout the middle east and Asia Islam is a leading force in the livelihood of all people, in Israel, a tiny piece of land, Judaism is calling the shots that echo around the region, in North America, and other places. in east Asia, Buddhist institutions have a strong influence over the lives of the common people.
religion has always been involved in all the 'hard' realities of life, war, classes, and politics.
 

TheKnight

Guardian of Life
Religion is all about power seeking. from North America where Christianity in the US is very influential in the continent and outside it. throughout the middle east and Asia Islam is a leading force in the livelihood of all people, in Israel, a tiny piece of land, Judaism is calling the shots that echo around the region, in North America, and other places. in east Asia, Buddhist institutions have a strong influence over the lives of the common people.
religion has always been involved in all the 'hard' realities of life, war, classes, and politics.

I would replace the word religion with people in all the places you use "religion" in your post. Religious values influence people to fight for certain things politically, which is good. But the actual religions themselves are not about power-seeking, etc.
 

xkatz

Well-Known Member
What Levite said about Israel and Judaism is spot on IMO. As to the OP, I would agree with Sacks' sentiments.
 

Levite

Higher and Higher
If you don't mind me asking, what's the rabbanut?, BTW, what is Israeli Judaism like?, I've heard that the Haredi are actuall the minority, but, for some reason, wield a lot of power, do a lot of Israeli' adhere to Haredi beliefs?.

The Rabbanut is the state-sanctioned apparatus of the Chief Rabbinates of Israel. Back in the period of the British Mandate, the UK ran British Palestine as much like a British colony as they could, and so they instituted a system of Chief Rabbinates for the cities, and eventually, for the entire region, though in truth such a system is really not congenial to modern Judaism at all. The informal coalition of settler affairs and freedom fighter groups that eventually became the first government of the independent State of Israel paid little heed to Chief Rabbinates and the politics of the Orthodox world, because the vast majority of Jews settling in British Palestine were at that time deeply secular, and mostly Marxist socialists. They needed some cooperation from the Orthodox to make Israel's existence a reality, and so they unthinkingly permitted the continuation of the Chief Rabbinates as a useful tool for the secular government interacting with the "religious" (i.e., Orthodox) communities.

There is an Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi and a Sefardi Chief Rabbi, and both have a council of advisors who are the de facto rabbinical court of authority in Israel. The Rabbanut was given the authority to be arbiters of marriage and divorce, which is why there is only now beginning to be limited forms of civil marriage in Israel-- up until this point, if you wanted to be married, you had to go to the Rabbanut; and if you didn't want to deal with them, you had to leave the country, get married elsewhere, and come back with foreign certification of marriage, which the secular government would honor.

The Rabbanut has always been an Orthodox institution, but its earliest Chief Rabbis were what we might today call center-left Orthodox, whereas for the past couple of decades, the Chief Rabbis have been increasingly Haredi.

Thus, not only is marriage difficult in Israel, but divorce can be a nightmare, as the Rabbanut's interpretation of the halakhot of divorce is, unsurprisingly, both exceedingly narrow and increasingly strict. And, since the halakhah dictates that in usual circumstances, a woman cannot remarry (or, in theory, have sex with any other man) until she receives a get (bill of divorcement) from her husband, who must voluntarily grant it, many are left in limbo by wishing to divorce cruel and abusive husbands who spitefully refuse to grant divorces, and the Rabbanut rabbinical courts simply shrug, and refuse to exercise any of the halakhic powers that rabbinical courts have to annul marriages or compel divorces. Some women have been agunot ("anchored" or "chained" women, unable to secure a divorce, or remarry, or get on with their lives) for literally decades because of this.

The Rabbanut also try to interfere in social laws, to make it a crime to violate shabbat publicly, or for the cities to run public transportation on shabbat; they support Haredi efforts to segregate the sexes in public, or on public buses; they quash the rights of non-Orthodox Jews to pray in egalitarian ways at the Kotel (the Western Wall).

The Rabbanut also runs the state hashgachat kashrut apparatus (the system of overseers and inspectors who certify the kashrut of restaurants and markets): and in doing so, they demand that business owners live up to an extremely rigorous and narrow Haredi interpretation of kashrut, which is not only complex but expensive for business owners, and they also charge usurious rates to license businesses as kosher. This is not only unnecessary by the halakhah of kashrut, but it is also out and out against a whole other host of halakhot.

Now the Rabbanut is trying to get into the business of deciding who is and is not a Jew: formerly, if one were to immigrate to Israel, one's status as a Jew was determined by the Ministry of the Interior. Now the Rabbanut wishes to control that: they will only accept conversions done by rabbis certified by the Rabbanut, only Haredi conversions, with proof the convert is living a Haredi lifestyle. If the person is Jewish by birth, they demand proof of Jewish ancestry, and (though they don't label it as such) proof of Orthodoxy.

The Rabbanut is doing their best to turn Israel into a theocracy. And while I am deeply in support of Israel being a Jewish State, I am vehemently opposed to it being a State for just some Jews-- especially when those few Jews would exclude the rest of us, and deprive us of our rights.
 

Caladan

Agnostic Pantheist
I would replace the word religion with people in all the places you use "religion" in your post. Religious values influence people to fight for certain things politically, which is good. But the actual religions themselves are not about power-seeking, etc.
If religion is not the people and the 'priesthood', then what is it? an invisible paper people only claim when its comfortable?
religion IS the people, and the people only.
 
The Rabbanut is the state-sanctioned apparatus of the Chief Rabbinates of Israel. Back in the period of the British Mandate, the UK ran British Palestine as much like a British colony as they could, and so they instituted a system of Chief Rabbinates for the cities, and eventually, for the entire region, though in truth such a system is really not congenial to modern Judaism at all. The informal coalition of settler affairs and freedom fighter groups that eventually became the first government of the independent State of Israel paid little heed to Chief Rabbinates and the politics of the Orthodox world, because the vast majority of Jews settling in British Palestine were at that time deeply secular, and mostly Marxist socialists. They needed some cooperation from the Orthodox to make Israel's existence a reality, and so they unthinkingly permitted the continuation of the Chief Rabbinates as a useful tool for the secular government interacting with the "religious" (i.e., Orthodox) communities.

There is an Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi and a Sefardi Chief Rabbi, and both have a council of advisors who are the de facto rabbinical court of authority in Israel. The Rabbanut was given the authority to be arbiters of marriage and divorce, which is why there is only now beginning to be limited forms of civil marriage in Israel-- up until this point, if you wanted to be married, you had to go to the Rabbanut; and if you didn't want to deal with them, you had to leave the country, get married elsewhere, and come back with foreign certification of marriage, which the secular government would honor.

The Rabbanut has always been an Orthodox institution, but its earliest Chief Rabbis were what we might today call center-left Orthodox, whereas for the past couple of decades, the Chief Rabbis have been increasingly Haredi.

Thus, not only is marriage difficult in Israel, but divorce can be a nightmare, as the Rabbanut's interpretation of the halakhot of divorce is, unsurprisingly, both exceedingly narrow and increasingly strict. And, since the halakhah dictates that in usual circumstances, a woman cannot remarry (or, in theory, have sex with any other man) until she receives a get (bill of divorcement) from her husband, who must voluntarily grant it, many are left in limbo by wishing to divorce cruel and abusive husbands who spitefully refuse to grant divorces, and the Rabbanut rabbinical courts simply shrug, and refuse to exercise any of the halakhic powers that rabbinical courts have to annul marriages or compel divorces. Some women have been agunot ("anchored" or "chained" women, unable to secure a divorce, or remarry, or get on with their lives) for literally decades because of this.

The Rabbanut also try to interfere in social laws, to make it a crime to violate shabbat publicly, or for the cities to run public transportation on shabbat; they support Haredi efforts to segregate the sexes in public, or on public buses; they quash the rights of non-Orthodox Jews to pray in egalitarian ways at the Kotel (the Western Wall).

The Rabbanut also runs the state hashgachat kashrut apparatus (the system of overseers and inspectors who certify the kashrut of restaurants and markets): and in doing so, they demand that business owners live up to an extremely rigorous and narrow Haredi interpretation of kashrut, which is not only complex but expensive for business owners, and they also charge usurious rates to license businesses as kosher. This is not only unnecessary by the halakhah of kashrut, but it is also out and out against a whole other host of halakhot.

Now the Rabbanut is trying to get into the business of deciding who is and is not a Jew: formerly, if one were to immigrate to Israel, one's status as a Jew was determined by the Ministry of the Interior. Now the Rabbanut wishes to control that: they will only accept conversions done by rabbis certified by the Rabbanut, only Haredi conversions, with proof the convert is living a Haredi lifestyle. If the person is Jewish by birth, they demand proof of Jewish ancestry, and (though they don't label it as such) proof of Orthodoxy.

The Rabbanut is doing their best to turn Israel into a theocracy. And while I am deeply in support of Israel being a Jewish State, I am vehemently opposed to it being a State for just some Jews-- especially when those few Jews would exclude the rest of us, and deprive us of our rights.

Thanks for explaining. I remember watching a programme last year about certain Jewish women who couldn't get a get/divorce, even though their husband had run off and they may not have had contact in years (decades even). I find that ironic, because, I remember being told by someone that Maimonides (I believe it was him anyway) said that if a husband wouldn't grant a divorce, the Rabbis (I forget the technical term) could order him to be beaten up, until he granted the get.

It's a shame there are people who are trying create oppressive laws and regimes, when some of the early Chief Rabbis of Israel seemed to have some really amazing things to say, like Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook, some of his quotes are really inspiring like:

Therefore, the pure righteous do not complain of the dark, but increase the light; they do not complain of evil, but increase justice; they do not complain of heresy, but increase faith; they do not complain of ignorance, but increase wisdom. (From "Arpilei Tohar", p. 27–28)

Here's another site I quite like

I remember reading somewhere that a group of Haredi men beat up some woman, on a bus,because she refused to go to the back of the bus, to me, that's going backwards, not forward.

I think you said Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz was Haredi, but, I've read that certain Haredi groups don't have anything to do with Steinsaltz (I read it on this blog). From what I've read, Steinsaltz seems far more compassionate (and progressive) compared to those that beat women up, throw stones at cars for driving on Shabbat (someone online who lives in Israel told me that), etc.
 

Levite

Higher and Higher
It's a shame there are people who are trying create oppressive laws and regimes, when some of the early Chief Rabbis of Israel seemed to have some really amazing things to say, like Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook, some of his quotes are really inspiring like:

Rav Kook was once in a generation, if that much. He was a great, great rabbi, and a very good man. But that was a long time ago, unfortunately.

I remember reading somewhere that a group of Haredi men beat up some woman, on a bus,because she refused to go to the back of the bus, to me, that's going backwards, not forward.

Yes, unfortunately, incidents like this occur all too often.

I think you said Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz was Haredi, but, I've read that certain Haredi groups don't have anything to do with Steinsaltz (I read it on this blog). From what I've read, Steinsaltz seems far more compassionate (and progressive) compared to those that beat women up, throw stones at cars for driving on Shabbat (someone online who lives in Israel told me that), etc.

Even today, not all Haredim, and not all Haredi rabbis, are of a piece. There are Haredim out there who see Haredi involvement in the institutions of Israel, and in the control of Orthodox institutions in America, as overweening pride, and neglect of halakhic principles of respect for other Jews and humility. They still think they're right, they just feel that we non-Haredim need to learn on our own that we're wrong, and that they should be here for kiruv (trying to bring non-Orthodox Jews into Orthodoxy) and not for forcing other Jews how to practice.

Rav Steinsaltz is definitely a compassionate Haredi. He is well known for being a good man, not just a great rabbi.
 
Top